I follow the reasoning for minimum size of the jump drive (must maintain a set size for jump bubble), but I don't see why the hull size would be restricted. Unless the jump buble is maintained with nodes installed on the hull. Couldn't a smaller ship be designed to use a jump drive for a 100 DT ship?
If what you're saying is true (it was likely done just for convenience's sake) then I think I'll go with just the minimum size for jump drive. At least for my own TU.
Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry
-----Original Message-----
From: "far_trader_mail"
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 14:53:25
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] TNE FF&S Errata (was Re: Ore Processor and two quick questions)
--- In , daryl@... wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the minimum hull size is? I've been using a 90 DT scout ship as the main scout ship for my pocket empire so if there is a reason behind this, I'd be very interested in it. (I do know I don't *have to* follow the rule, but the reasoning behind it will help me figure out if I *want to* or not.)
>
> Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry
>
Only Marc will know for sure. I suspect it's just a convenient round number for a game rule that made it easier to write the original CT Book 2 Ship Design rules by having a simple table with (mostly) even 100ton breakpoints.
There have been suppositions (Marc's Jump Space article in JTAS first did maybe) that the minimum size is what is required to maintain a stable jump bubble and anything smaller gets popped/crushed/whatever and the ship is destroyed.
That said I long ago (CT The Traveller Book) penciled in my own TU design notes for the minimum hull size for jump drives getting beaten back as TL progresses :-) (but I never imagined it as anything but alternate tech)
Dan "far-trader" Burns